New Craze Of The Rug

The purpose of my research is to explore and offer analysis of the controversy over the use of trigger warnings and safe spaces on college campuses, in order to understand when, where, and most importantly, regarding what subjects their use is appropriate.

In the article “Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces and Free Speech, too” published in the New York Times by Sophie Downes, Downes argues in response to a letter sent out by the dean of the University of Chicago. The letter states that safe spaces and trigger warnings were an issue deterring students from having free speech and therefore would not be supported on the Chicago campus anymore. Downes argues that the letter was just a poor attempt to advert attention away from the real issues on the campus—ones that the dean will not meet with student council about and will not talk about at all. Sophie Downes argues that safe spaces and trigger warnings actually encourage free space and enhance support and community—two values that the dean said were deterred by the existence of them.

As a class, we mainly fell into the category of those who would not tell a professor if they had any concerns regarding a class. The standard here with the usage of trigger warnings is how do we as a society know what actually will require a trigger warning. If no one has a standard, then the policy would be mocked for being too lackadaisical. I see trigger warnings being necessary in some situations where I would want to know if something graphic is going to be shown to me. We came across two definitions of safe spaces in the class: 1) an actual physical safe space and 2) an ideological safe space. The concern with the physical safe space is that it seems more reductive or childish, which interestingly enough is how the Baby Boomers assess our generation.

After reading the article I concur with the author’s views on colleges coddling students who are offended by words or small actions is doing more harm than good. The article covered the issues in detail and gave many examples of the conception before the 1980’s when children could roam free in the world with less worry for parents to where next generation who had more protective parents because of the increase of kidnappings, removal of physical activities in school, school shootings, and bullying after the 1980’s.The authors discuss how coddling is not good for students, society, the workplace, government or the future. Coddling removes cognitive thinking and the use of good critical thinking skills. Coddling will force students to think with emotion instead of logic. Society will not always bend over backwards to appease ones feelings or change to make someone feel comfortable. Thinking with emotions can create a fog that can hinder ones view of reality.

The issuing of trigger warnings, according to the American Association of Professors, can be counterproductive. “The voluntary use of trigger warnings…assume that individuals will respond negatively to certain content,” which leads to reducing students to vulnerable victims rather than full participants in class discussions or debates. Trigger warnings are thus inadequate, “reasonable accommodations should be done on individual basis” rather than exposing students to trigger warnings that might affect how they view a material that has educational value.

“A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense” (Lukianoff and Haidt 44). Colleges are sheltering their students from words and ideas that students do not like or are found to be offensive. Affecting their education and cognitive skills, scientists are warning colleges to refrain from coddling the students and allowing other viewpoints to be spoken. People are speaking their minds, saying their own views; however, some people are over sensitive and take these viewpoints offensively. In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt successfully argues using rhetorical questions, specific examples, and affective visuals that protecting college students from words and ideas deteriorates their education and mental health.

For example, “censoring this material is a bad idea, and providing context is the best avenue for explaining why” (Hanlon). As you can see, when certain things are not taught in our culture, it becomes a trigger warning and along the line, someone is hurting from it because our culture says “NO”. Furthermore, the purpose of trigger warnings is to have students react to stuff that will make them uncomfortable and this can help us catch problems before they become “catastrophes” (Hanlon). To sum up, our society makes it tough to present trigger warnings, therefore leaving those who are in need of help left

Universities interpret the idea of trigger warnings as taking a student’s right to learn freely away, for another student’s well- being. Imagine a class of students studying to become professionals in criminal justice and they are shown a graphical video on a murder case. One student may have a childhood memory of witnessing a murder and this video presentation is going to trigger those emotions to surface back to the students mind and emotionally harm them. Now if the student were to say something and the professor stops the video, which takes away the right for students to learn all for the sake of one student. Jennifer Medina writer of Free Speech: Is it Endangered on Campus, states "Warnings affect the open mind that students... are expected to bring to the material"(Medina) Medina uses this to tell us that trigger warnings would keep students from receiving information that is much needed to master a career. How are you going to be a homicide detective if you do not know how to handle the situation simply because you were not allowed to watch and discuss a video in your classroom? The U.S. Constitution's First Amendment states that congress cannot restrict the right of a person to speak freely. Everyone has the right to comment on anything they'd like however they like. Therefore; college professors have the right to teach the material they have to including every detail

Trigger statements are becoming more and more popular in syllabi, especially on college campuses. These provide students, especially those with post-traumatic stress disorder, with a warning about possibly uncomfortable content that could cause a flashback or panic attack. There are several different opinions about trigger warnings. Jenny Jarvie, the author of the article “Trigger Happy,” believes that they have gone too far and are a detriment to society (Jarvie 6). To enhance Jarvie’s point further, in their article “The Coddling of the American Mind” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt explain how trigger warnings cause metal illness on campuses across the country. The opposing view is that they are necessary to have a fulfilling learning

In Lindsay Holmes’s article “A Quick Lesson on What Trigger Warnings Actually Do,” she states that trigger warnings are misinterpreted cautions notifying whether or not a discussion could cause emotional distress, and often are not implemented for this reason. Holmes begins by recounting when the University of Chicago announced they would not be focusing on Trigger Warnings or safe places; although the university later tells expresses that their initial statement was misinterpreted, the author uses this to open the discussion on the importance of trigger warnings.

Lindsay Holmes’s “A Quick Lesson On What Trigger Warnings Actually Do” is a persuasive piece written in response to the backlash that The University of Chicago received against implementing trigger warnings for their students. Likewise, Holmes sets up her argument in the hopes of persuading the general population the importance of creating safe zones and use trigger warnings for those who need them. In order to do this, Holmes uses a series of rhetorical devices throughout her essay to develop her argument for the use of trigger warnings. Holmes achieves her goal of persuading the audience that trigger warnings should be taken into consideration through her intentional use of rhetorical appeals, anticipated objections, and hypophoras in this essay.

Also, they were to provide therapeutic services to those who happened to be victims of PTSD, trauma, assault, and any form of violence. In most cases, they concentrate on issues like sexism, racism, ableism, islamophobia, and trans-antagonism. See, all for a good course! However, the same society that had once put itself in their own shoes and had made an informed decision of having them and warning labels in our institutions too-where contents, films, or materials with graphic elaborations of such experiences-is the same (with a fair share of its population) feeling the need to disintegrate from the idea of having the so called “safe spaces” and “trigger-warnings” in higher education institutions.

Trigger warnings can affect a student’s learning experience; however, the student also affects their own learning experience by making their own choice(s). First, some students construe trigger warnings as an excuse to not learn vital material, thus affecting their learning experience negatively. Second, some students interpret trigger warnings as an actual warning served to students that encountered an inimical experience since those students may be less apt to view the material with an open-mind.

Due to increased diversity on College campuses, colleges are changing and developing new ways to become more inclusive in order to create environments where a mix of student cultures, ethnicities, races, socioeconomic statuses and genders can feel comfortable sharing the same campus space. One way to help create this environment is through using trigger warnings (warnings before content to help alert students who may have suffered from trauma in an event like war to avoid content that might bring back recurring panic attacks or flashbacks) and through creating “Safe Spaces”. Safe spaces “is a term for an area or forum where either a marginalized group are not supposed to face standard mainstream stereotypes and marginalization, or in which

Sally attended Joliet Junior College and took a general psychology class. One day when she attended her psychology class, her professor warned students of a topic that there were going to talk about in class which was how abuse can damage an individual’s mental state. Sally has been through abuse in her past and is uncomfortable with that certain topic, so she left class because she was alerted. Ultimately, she didn’t want to revisit her past of abuse. This is considered a trigger warning, in which professors give a warning about topics that they will discuss in class that can lead to some sort of discomfort for students. Trigger warnings are used on campuses that are considered a safe space. The term safe space is defined as an environment where students can feel like themselves and are not exposed to any harm physically or mentally (Merriam-Webster). Various of colleges/universities have safe spaces so that their students don’t have to go through discrimination of sorts or any harm. Safe spaces are good for students, but there are negative outcomes from it, such as it doesn’t let individuals who have trauma cope with what happened to them and limiting freedom of expression due to trigger warnings. Even though are negative outcomes from safe spaces, there are positive results that benefit college students such as a decrease in anxiety and prevention of hate speech.